Robert Harris is supposedly overseeing Lawrence on Blu-ray. At this point, we don't yet know what stage it's in, in terms of progress. Taking a cue from Paidgeek's threads on dialnorm and Blu-ray extras in which we were able to influence Sony in deciding what we wanted, how about we do a poll to see how we want Lawrence presented.

This is my fav movie of all time and I expect it to blow me away. Still, it wouldn't hurt to let Sony know what we'd like. Who knows it might help.

A New Friggin Transfer. With no EE, no DNR, from 65mm elements.

TruHD, PCM, etc comes after that.

I want to have to dust off my Bedroom from all the sand that blows through my screen.

Poll is now up.

You forgot codec ;) I'll take AVC pls :) None of this VC1 crap!

How about leave off the PCM track and go with full, master grade 24 bit TrueHD audio (no dial norm!) from restored and carefully remixed audio stems. Bring back a closer approx. of the directionalized dialog and sound effects of the original mix!

Bring in Robert Harris from the start and do a frame by frame 65mm restoration + digital restoration.

Add the original 65mm trailer this time! Mr. Harris has it!

Oh, and for the love of GOD could you finish the theater balcony sequence with a good voice over actor so it can finally be placed back into the film where it belongs!!!??

Dan

As others have said a new transfer from 65mm elements! Full restoration (no "enhancements"), and an audio mix that is as close as possible to the best original theatrical presentations.

A New Friggin Transfer. With no EE, no DNR, from 65mm elements.

TruHD, PCM, etc comes after that.
Agreed. Especially transfer from the 65mm IP direct on modern film scanner optimized for 65mm elements at 4K. Downsample to 1080p in the end.

It may be a 2 disc release but I believe the film will be on one BD50.

I want 2.0 PCM, anything else is not a factor for me. I don't mind if there are other tracks, I just hope it won't take away from the PQ of the feature.

You forgot codec ;) I'll take AVC pls :) None of this VC1 crap!
First off, VC-1 isn't crap. One of my fav old transfers is Searchers and it's in VC-1. But this is Sony. It will be AVC.

I haven't heard that Robert Harris was working on it. What is the source of that? Great news if in fact true.

I want to have to dust off my Bedroom from all the sand that blows through my screen.
Genius...

Someone explain to me the logic of having two lossless tracks? Give me the original audio in either LPCM or TrueHD (2.0), then give me a DD+ or DTS-HD (lossy) 5.1 mix if we have to have it. There is little point to me in having a remixed, surround sound audio track in a lossless codec.

Also, this should fit on a single disc for the movie, then give me a second disc for features. What I do not want is a dual encode for PiP-style commentary.

Perhaps we can add some options to the poll?

Bill

Disc 1: BD-50, AVC + PCM

Disc 2: ALL EXTRAS from the 2-disc Limited Edition set.

The problem with LOA IS the film elements. There are different generations all throughout the film. Some are from the original Taking Negative, others are from IP's while others are from lower generation film elements because of the added footage and the age of the elements.

I fear that HD is going to bring out these irregularities even more.

Just on a note of trivia - the long shot of Anthony Quinn coming up to the water hole was done with a special lens that was made specifically for LOA and has never been used since.

Just on a note of trivia - the long shot of Anthony Quinn coming up to the water hole was done with a special lens that was made specifically for LOA and has never been used since.

Lee, you of course meant it's Omar Sharif that approaches Lawrence and Tafas at the Masturah Well. I hate to be trivial about trivia. :)

And this is the one title that will absolutely make me expand my boundaries in Blu-Ray.

Any idea of when this is being released?

How about leave off the PCM track and go with full, master grade 24 bit TrueHD audio (no dial norm!) from restored and carefully remixed audio stems. Bring back a closer approx. of the directionalized dialog and sound effects of the original mix!

Bring in Robert Harris from the start and do a frame by frame 65mm restoration + digital restoration.

Add the original 65mm trailer this time! Mr. Harris has it!

Oh, and for the love of GOD could you finish the theater balcony sequence with a good voice over actor so it can finally be placed back into the film where it belongs!!!??

Dan

Amen.

There is no reason for PCM - put in 24 bit TrueHD and maximize PQ. VC1 or AVC.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Sony knows how beloved this film has become for many classic film enthusiasts. The Fifth Element debacle was the shot heard 'round the world when Blu-ray was launched and they are making reparations. I believe they want the release of this title to be one of the final nails in the opposing camp's coffin. A definitive release of David Lean's epic (my personal favorite film) would reflect very positively upon Sony and their Blu-ray format.

This will be a great release and I'll be picking it up on the day its released but its simply not the nail in any coffin. Unfortunately we live in a world where Ghost Rider has a better chance of being a nail than this great movie. Both formats have many nails but the coffins are not in sight yet.

I voted for the two-disc with better audio, even though that is likely overkill. The film encoded in AVC should fit very comfortably on a single BD50 with plenty of room for audio options (20 or 24-bit TrueHD, please). A second disc for supps is fine.

I voted for the two-disc with better audio, even though that is likely overkill. The film encoded in AVC should fit very comfortably on a single BD50 with plenty of room for audio options (20 or 24-bit TrueHD, please). A second disc for supps is fine.

Yea, this is this is the most likely scenario. I would prefer the movie split on 2 discs at the interlude like REDS.

I'm no expert on the numbers but say Lawrence (227min) is done using AVC at 30mbps constant with 40+ spikes with PCM 2.0 (gotta have the original stereo IMO) and True HD 5.1. Any idea how much space this would take?

The problem with LOA IS the film elements. There are different generations all throughout the film. Some are from the original Taking Negative, others are from IP's while others are from lower generation film elements because of the added footage and the age of the elements.

I fear that HD is going to bring out these irregularities even more.


Exactly. These irregularities are going to be there, and people are setting themselves up to be disappointed. The people who are looking for perfection should be looking forward to releases of movies like 2001 or Patton, where the potential for perfection is there.

Yea, this is this is the most likely scenario. I would prefer the movie split on 2 discs at the interlude like REDS.

I'm no expert on the numbers but say Lawrence (227min) is done using AVC at 30mbps constant with 40+ spikes with PCM 2.0 (gotta have the original stereo IMO) and True HD 5.1. Any idea how much space this would take?PCM 2.0? LOA was filmed in Super Panavision 70 and released with a 6 track magnetic sound track.

I'm no expert on the numbers but say Lawrence (227min) is done using AVC at 30mbps constant with 40+ spikes with PCM 2.0 (gotta have the original stereo IMO) and True HD 5.1. Any idea how much space this would take?
I have read that Lawrence originally had a four track mix. Anyone know more about this?

I have read that Lawrence originally had a four track mix. Anyone know more about this?This is a quote from the sound editor of the restored LOA.

http://hollywoodlostandfound.net/sound/lawrence/

MSNL: Was the film mixed six-track stereo, originally?

RA: The original 70mm release was a six-track discrete, non-Dolby, because there was no Dolby noise reduction. 25 years ago, the really big first-run pictures like "Oklahoma" and the Cinerama shows were released as six-track discrete.

MSNL: That means five separate channels for the front speakers and a surround channel. Today you have more commonly the "six-track spread," which has three across the front, surround, and two more at left-center and right-center with low-frequencies delivered from the other three.

RA: Right. The so-called "Baby Boom" channels. Then in those days the 35mm 'Scope versions were sometimes magnetically striped for four-track stereo. Today the same effect would be gotten from a Dolby stereo optical print. Anyway, this film had been progressively chopped-down over the years. Bob started researching where all the original (sound and picture) elements might be. He talked to Sir David and started to dig around in the storerooms in London, and in Columbia's Hollywood, New York, and "salt-mine" vaults in Kansas or wherever. There was no track for the original long version of the movie! He did manage to find certain parts of the cut scenes, but only in 35mm composite prints. Bob had to try to piece the whole movie together. The 65mm camera negative existed. It had been stored. I guess they figured if nothing else, they could sell lots of stock footage of the desert! But the sound? There were no original 1/4 inch tapes of the production sound. I'm not an historian, but it's possible in those days they shot production (sound) directly to 35mm magnetic film stock. But whatever it was recorded on, if it does exist, no one could find it. So there were no dailies of sound. They threw out all the original material, and yet they saved trims from the old work print. It had all been rolled up in little rolls and put in metal cans which had literally rusted shut! They'd been sitting in a storeroom in England since 1962. So there was work track, one copy only. And of course wherever they made a cut, there was a (sound) cut. Bob found some trims where somebody had taken a 35mm projection print (mono optical) and cut sections out. He made a mag (magnetic film) master from that composite. For some sections, that was the only sound that existed.

I want a simple BD50 AVC release with 24bit Dolby TrueHD and nothing else. All picture and sound - no special features unless they are on a second disc.

Any idea of when this is being released?
Undecided at this exact moment in time.

One camp favors around the holidays at the end of the year.
The other camp feels SPE should keep this particular powder dry.

The former camp is winning. :)

Yea, this is this is the most likely scenario. I would prefer the movie split on 2 discs at the interlude like REDS.

I'm no expert on the numbers but say Lawrence (227min) is done using AVC at 30mbps constant with 40+ spikes with PCM 2.0 (gotta have the original stereo IMO) and True HD 5.1. Any idea how much space this would take?
At 30mbps average, the video alone would take 49GB.
Let's say 6mbps for audio (THD + PCM 2.0) => 10GB

59GB total.

With AVC at 24mbps average, the video would take 40GB.

Sony can take a very very long time in getting this done as long as the movie itself (picture and sound) is absolutely perfect and best possible.

I also do not care much about special features (I already have a lot of them), comment tracks, interactive features, IME, web enablement or any of the other things that Warners holds up Blu-ray disks for.

Just make it the best that it can be.

Alas, it will not compare to the original 70mm anyway!

The other camp feels SPE should keep this particular powder dry.

Of course. Why would Sony want to offer the consumers they are trying to get to foot the bill for their latest attempt at world domination some moldy old multiple Academy Award winning epic when they can be treated to such gems as RV, Wild Things, and Click.

Undecided at this exact moment in time.

One camp favors around the holidays at the end of the year.
The other camp feels SPE should keep this particular powder dry.

The former camp is winning. :)
From what I have seen, Sony BD doesn't have a camp who believes in releasing anything pre-1990. And I do mean ANYTHING. Lawrence would be quite a break from that trend.

Of course. Why would Sony want to offer the consumers they are trying to get to foot the bill for their latest attempt at world domination some moldy old multiple Academy Award winning epic when they can be treated to such gems as RV, Wild Things, and Click.
Well Robert, I may not be a film sophisticate like you....................

but RV had me practically rolling on the floor – which is not unusual I guess, as Robin Williams’ antics nearly caused me to crash my bike on the road during a group ride with him.

As for Wild Things……Denise Richards...................HOT !
In any format or presentation. :)

Sony can take a very very long time in getting this done as long as the movie itself (picture and sound) is absolutely perfect and best possible.

I also do not care much about special features (I already have a lot of them), comment tracks, interactive features, IME, web enablement or any of the other things that Warners holds up Blu-ray disks for.

Just make it the best that it can be.

Alas, it will not compare to the original 70mm anyway!

But will you be happy with the result?

Exactly. These irregularities are going to be there, and people are setting themselves up to be disappointed. The people who are looking for perfection should be looking forward to releases of movies like 2001 or Patton, where the potential for perfection is there.

Of the 70,000+ films made - only about 100 or so were shot in 65mm. Of these very special films, it is recogonized that LOA is in the worse shape of all of them.

I know this is a BRD Software Forum, but if you want to see what a well transfered 65mm film looks like - see GRAND PRIX. It is stunning to say the least. Something to look forward to for the BRD owners. MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY and THE BATTLE OF THE BUGLE do not look as good as GP.

Well Robert, I may not be a film sophisticate like you....................

but RV had me practically rolling on the floor – which is not unusual I guess, as Robin Williams’ antics nearly caused me to crash my bike on the road during a group ride with him.

As for Wild Things……Denise Richards...................HOT !
In any format or presentation.

Nice. In one post you insult me, namedrop some celebrity you rode a bike with, and try to justify Denise Richards' tits over Sir David's greatest film achievement. You are truly a piece of work.

Sir David's greatest film achievement
I heard a dat …………………….
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10565847&highlight=event#post10565847

try to justify Denise Richards' tits
As to mammary glands, I always prefer the non-augmented type and I really wasn’t looking for evidence one way or another during Wild Things (does anyone know if she is pre or post during that picture ?).........as I was admiring her fine legs. :D

Nice. You are truly a piece of work.
Brevity is the essence of lingerie…..oops :o I mean – Wit.

Now, may we continue with the poll regarding a film by the "world dominating" SPE as some people are watching. ;)

From what I have seen, Sony BD doesn't have a camp who believes in releasing anything pre-1990. And I do mean ANYTHING. Lawrence would be quite a break from that trend.

Sony would very much like to release LoA, Kwai, Navarrone, and all of their other older classics. They are very proud of these films.

The difficulty is that it is very apparent that sales are very low for classic titles right now. Here are some Videoscan data for a few HD DVD titles from release last fall through March 2007:

Forbidden Planet (HD DVD): 1311
Forbidden Planet (HD DVD "Ultimate"): 440
Grand Prix (HD DVD): 2177
Mutiny on the Bounty (HD DVD): 653

When I saw these and similar numbers, my heart sank. I realized it was going to be a very long time before we see classics on Blu-ray. No wonder Warners never bothered releasing these titles on Blu-ray, who could blame them for waiting? No wonder Sony is holding up LoA.

IMO, the current adopters who care about the classics already have huge collections and don't necessarily want to buy more copies of even their favorite films just yet. Also, a lot of the demographic for both formats (especially Blu-ray with the PS3) veers toward sci-fi and action.

According to this view, we have to wait until adoption greatly increases and we see a lot more people from a broader demographic and people who don't already have big collections.

This is another road that leads us back to Rome: we need to end the format war so that adoption will increase and broaden so that we can see more classic titles from all studios.

Sony would very much like to release LoA, Kwai, Navarrone, and all of their other older classics. They are very proud of these films.

The difficulty is that it is very apparent that sales are very low for classic titles right now. ....
Well, in terms of the age old "chicken and the egg" argument, Sony has done next to nothing to get people who want the classic titles to buy into the hardware. Instead, Sony is hell bent on catering to the PS3 crowd in order to win the format war via their "PS3 or bust" effort. Sony's past efforts with their catalog titles on DVD have never much impressed me, and don't even get me started on the Stooges, which SHOULD be something that they are proud of, but evidently aren't. I'm not saying that Sony should be flooding the market with older titles, and I'm not even saying that they should be keeping up with Warner. What I am saying is that they should at least put out the occasional classic title. More and more Sony is making this feel like a movie format for gamers, not a format for movie lovers.

A New Friggin Transfer. With no EE, no DNR, from 65mm elements.

TruHD, PCM, etc comes after that.

Amen Brother! :cool:

Well, in terms of the age old "chicken and the egg" argument, Sony has done next to nothing to get people who want the classic titles to buy into the hardware. Instead, Sony is hell bent on catering to the PS3 crowd in order to win the format war via their "PS3 or bust" effort. Sony's past efforts with their catalog titles on DVD have never much impressed me, and don't even get me started on the Stooges, which SHOULD be something that they are proud of, but evidently aren't. I'm not saying that Sony should be flooding the market with older titles, and I'm not even saying that they should be keeping up with Warner. What I am saying is that they should at least put out the occasional classic title. More and more Sony is making this feel like a movie format for gamers, not a format for movie lovers.

Yes, that is the conundrum, isn't it? Personally, I would have released their best classics and hoped to appeal to good taste.

When I was in charge of programming for a cable TV system, I was accused of having too high a sense of quality. I remember a friend saying to me, "I know you really like good films, but when I come home late at night, sometimes I just want to see some trash."

I do applaud Warners' approach to the classics but, hey, the numbers just aren't there yet to justify the effort. Sony is shipping their latest hits (Ghost Rider??) and that is probably the right thing for them to do.

When they do release Lawrence, I expect it to reallly be "Beyond High Definition." No excuses.

The difficulty is that it is very apparent that sales are very low for classic titles right now. Here are some Videoscan data for a few HD DVD titles from release last fall through March 2007:

Forbidden Planet (HD DVD): 1311
Forbidden Planet (HD DVD "Ultimate"): 440
Grand Prix (HD DVD): 2177
Mutiny on the Bounty (HD DVD): 653

When I saw these and similar numbers, my heart sank. I realized it was going to be a very long time before we see classics on Blu-ray. No wonder Warners never bothered releasing these titles on Blu-ray, who could blame them for waiting? No wonder Sony is holding up LoA.

In an unfair way, you could blame HD DVD owners as the reason these films haven't made it to Blu-ray. Because there's no IME holding alot of those back. If they had bought more copies, maybe these would have shown up in blue cases by now. :p

I'm guilty too though. I have an A1, but am only buying Universal titles.

Undecided at this exact moment in time.

One camp favors around the holidays at the end of the year.
The other camp feels SPE should keep this particular powder dry.

The former camp is winning. :)

The sooner(without rushing things too fast) the better in my book.

I don't believe it's possible to use 65mm elements with the current scanning techniques.

Other than that I'd rather see 24-bit lossless in any form as opposed to having both a 16-bit PCM and 20-bit TrueHD. I'd rather see one lossless track and have the 24-bit.

it is very easy.

sony should release 2 versions.

1 make an ultimate pack.

this release has part 1 on 1 disc. part 2 on a second disc with extras. for the hardcore PQ and AQ fanbase. maybe even do a third disc with restoration explanation etc. include booklet etc.

2. make an ordinary version. 1 disc. with no extras. just movie and 1 lossless track.

this would make everybody happy. the hardcore and the ordinary users.

Of the 70,000+ films made - only about 100 or so were shot in 65mm. Of these very special films, it is recogonized that LOA is in the worse shape of all of them.

That is not true. Lawrence Of Arabia is in excellent condition after it was restored in '89 by Katz and Harris. A restored 65mm interpositive was actually used for the current HD transfer which in turn was used for the original DVD in 2001. That HD transfer has too much EE and incorrect color though. For the superbit release in 2003 the color was fixed by Robert Harris but the EE is still there so a new HD transfer should be made to get rid of that.
70mm films that are really in bad shape are the Roadshows of It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World and John Wayne's The Alamo.

I know this is a BRD Software Forum, but if you want to see what a well transfered 65mm film looks like - see GRAND PRIX. It is stunning to say the least. Something to look forward to for the BRD owners. MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY and THE BATTLE OF THE BUGLE do not look as good as GP.

If I'm not mistaken the Grand Prix HD transfer was derived from a 35mm interpositive and not 65mm elements.

Well, in terms of the age old "chicken and the egg" argument, Sony has done next to nothing to get people who want the classic titles to buy into the hardware. Instead, Sony is hell bent on catering to the PS3 crowd in order to win the format war via their "PS3 or bust" effort. Sony's past efforts with their catalog titles on DVD have never much impressed me, and don't even get me started on the Stooges, which SHOULD be something that they are proud of, but evidently aren't. I'm not saying that Sony should be flooding the market with older titles, and I'm not even saying that they should be keeping up with Warner. What I am saying is that they should at least put out the occasional classic title. More and more Sony is making this feel like a movie format for gamers, not a format for movie lovers.

Couldn't agree more with you. If they want to broaden the demographic of Blu owners they should release stuff that appeals to other people than the PS3 crowd. It might not sell immediately but it will pull new people in.
Sony have always been abysmal when it comes to releasing classics though. We're 10 years into DVD and they still haven't released the Budd Boetticher/Randolph Scott westerns. :mad: Makes me wish that Warner or Fox owned their classic catalogue.

I don't believe it's possible to use 65mm elements with the current scanning techniques.

There are several telecine machines capable of scanning large format elements.

If I'm not mistaken the Grand Prix HD transfer was derived from a 35mm interpositive and not 65mm elements.

you are not mistaken, all of warners 65/70mm titles including searchers were done this way.

There are several telecine machines capable of scanning large format elements.

Robert Harris weighed in on this (http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/showpost.php?p=2977929&postcount=9) a few months back.

The current functional 65mm transfer equipment are basically dinosaurs, with very, very little control over image.
The creation of a 35mm IP, derived from the O or restoration 65mm neg will yield an image with any number of fewer problems.

That is not true. Lawrence Of Arabia is in excellent condition after it was restored in '89 by Katz and Harris. A restored 65mm interpositive was actually used for the current HD transfer which in turn was used for the original DVD in 2001. That HD transfer has too much EE and incorrect color though. For the superbit release in 2003 the color was fixed by Robert Harris but the EE is still there so a new HD transfer should be made to get rid of that.70mm films that are really in bad shape are the Roadshows of It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World and John Wayne's The Alamo.

I was at the Ziegfield in 1989 to see the opening show of the new "fully restored" verison of LOA. You could easily see where the film was pieced together from different film elements and generations.

This has already been discussed in a previous post - as far as what was used to make the 1989 version.

There is no single Taking Negative for the whole movie.


If I'm not mistaken the Grand Prix HD transfer was derived from a 35mm interpositive and not 65mm elements.

Link?

Good stuff, so far.
I hope that everyone who is posting, is also voting.

The sooner(without rushing things too fast) the better in my book.
Well I'm not much of a name dropper so, I will say that I think this title is now pretty much out of the hands of G.C. and on to the next cog in the Sony machine.

So, if you or anyone else can tell me who G.C. is (I hate to drop names), then I may provide you with a little further insight regarding this title ( or at least a link, if I can find one).

Hint –
Let’s see…………. I believe you could say that G.C. is kinda analogous to Ned Price (oops, name drop :rolleyes: ) at WB.

Link?


there you go lee; robert harris on grand prix...

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/archive/index.php/t-242562.html

there you go lee; robert harris on grand prix...

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/archive/index.php/t-242562.html

Thank you - I stand corrected

Honestly, if I could get exactly what I want I would take no supplements. Just the film sourced from 4K elements of the 70mm film with 5.1-7.1 LPCM at the highest resolution properly. Spread it over 2 BD50s and have the disc swap right after the intermission

Honestly, if I could get exactly what I want I would take no supplements. Just the film sourced from 4K elements of the 70mm film with 5.1-7.1 LPCM at the highest resolution properly. Spread it over 2 BD50s and have the disc swap right after the intermission :cool:

Well Robert, I may not be a film sophisticate like you....................

but RV had me practically rolling on the floor – which is not unusual I guess, as Robin Williams’ antics nearly caused me to crash my bike on the road during a group ride with him.

As for Wild Things……Denise Richards...................HOT !
In any format or presentation. :)

I'm there with you, as much as I like the classics, there's no point in dismissing some mindless fun.

RV, Benchwarmers are great titles in my book and got me laughing out loud for almost the entire duration of the movie.

I also happen to enjoy the likes of Wild Things and Cruel Intentions very much.


For the LOA release, I'd like a 2 Disc-set:

Disc 1: BD-50, AVC and one form of lossless audio for the feature alone
Disc 2: All the extras from the collector's edition and what more they can put together for this movie

ps: I voted option 1 for the lack of a better option, but I think 2 lossless tracks would do more harm than good, given the lengh of the movie.

Bring in Robert Harris from the start and do a frame by frame 65mm restoration + digital restoration.

Oh, and for the love of GOD could you finish the theater balcony sequence with a good voice over actor so it can finally be placed back into the film where it belongs!!!??

Dan

yep

Harris restored 65mm elements in 1989, Lean was involved. I am assuming that Sony will release that version (216 minutes). Probably won't fit on a single disc (a bummer). I certainly hope that Sony's business guys let Harris do his thing, it would be really nice if they funded a new telecine for 65mm but my guess is that it will end up being done via 35mm IP.

Harris restored 65mm elements in 1989, Lean was involved.
Visual aid :)

nice!

So, if you or anyone else can tell me who G.C. is (I hate to drop names), then I may provide you with a little further insight regarding this title ( or at least a link, if I can find one).


Grover Crisp

Of the 70,000+ films made - only about 100 or so were shot in 65mm. Of these very special films, it is recogonized that LOA is in the worse shape of all of them.


This is not the case.

I spoke with Robert Harris (restorer of Lawrence) and he told me that Around the World in 80 Days (70mm 30fps version) is unprintable and unrestorable, yellow layer is gone. 1956 Best Picture Award (and one of my very favorite films). The 35mm 24fps version is in good shape, fortunately.

Apparently there are some concerns about Porgy and Bess but the Gershwin estate has held up all activity for this film, which is a tragedy.

Harris has also stated that Lawrence is now in good shape after the restoration.

This is not the case.

I spoke with Robert Harris (restorer of Lawrence) and he told me that Around the World in 80 Days (70mm 30fps version) is unprintable and unrestorable, yellow layer is gone. 1956 Best Picture Award (and one of my very favorite films). The 35mm 24fps version is in good shape, fortunately.
.
Then it is not unrestorable. If the 65mm yellow layer is gone but exists on 35mm you can combine cyan and magenta from the 65mm with the yellow from the 35mm and use clever digital processing to get closer to the original yellow resolution. It won't be exactly like the 65mm original but better than the 35mm alone. If someone wants to pay for it is another issue. In some years 4K DI will be cheaper and common so this kind of thing might make more financial sense.

Grover Crisp
Well hot damn !

I didn’t think anyone would get that one correct ! :eek:
I gotta remember you. :)

Since, Michel brought up "yellow layer" in his post above, here is a link to an interview between Bob Harris and G.C (for those unfamiliar with the name)..........
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/robertharris/harris110804.html

I’ll be heading on into work in a couple hours and I’ll see what I can say or link you to for a bit more insight into the status of this title, without stepping on anyone’s toes.

I’ll be heading on into work in a couple hours and I’ll see what I can say or link you to for a bit more insight into the status of this title, without stepping on anyone’s toes.

:cool:

I’ll see what I can say or link you to for a bit more insight into the status of this title, without stepping on anyone’s toes.
I’m told that you just have to know where to go to get the most cutting edge news from informed sources in a harassment free environment :)........

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=4988

For the post pertaining to this particular production…………
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=111655#post111655

Close attention to the wording of this ^ statement should provide an insight as to its location in "the process."

Carry on.

Then it is not unrestorable. If the 65mm yellow layer is gone but exists on 35mm you can combine cyan and magenta from the 65mm with the yellow from the 35mm and use clever digital processing to get closer to the original yellow resolution. It won't be exactly like the 65mm original but better than the 35mm alone. If someone wants to pay for it is another issue. In some years 4K DI will be cheaper and common so this kind of thing might make more financial sense.

Interesting idea but I don't think it will be possible as the 30fps and 24fps versions are different films. They were actually shot with different cameras at the same time.
From www.widescreenmuseum.com:
Rather than film two significantly different versions, as was necessary in Oklahoma!, Todd's director of photography, Lionel Linden, A.S.C., shot both versions in 65mm. In some cases he used two identical Todd-AO cameras and lenses side by side, one running at 30fps for the 70mm version, and the other running at 24fps for the 35mm reduction print, in other cases the same camera was used by changing the camera speed, and in some cases, the material photographed by a single camera was used in both versions, though this could not be done with dialog sequences.

Then it is not unrestorable. If the 65mm yellow layer is gone but exists on 35mm you can combine cyan and magenta from the 65mm with the yellow from the 35mm and use clever digital processing to get closer to the original yellow resolution. It won't be exactly like the 65mm original but better than the 35mm alone. If someone wants to pay for it is another issue. In some years 4K DI will be cheaper and common so this kind of thing might make more financial sense.

Good idea but not possible in this case. Around the World in 80 Days (and Oklahoma!) were actually filmed twice with different takes, camera setups, and some editing, once in 70MM and once in 35MM. The difference is profound.

You can see the differences in Oklahoma! because the DVD actually has both versions.

This methodology was eliminated in 1958 when Todd-AO switched to 24FPS and South Pacific was only shot once, in 70mm, with the 35mm version being optical reduction. That technique was henceforth used.

Unlike in the DVD days, the "superbit" concept seems moot now to me. Nothing I have ever read has pointed to any hi-def disc release (in either format) suffering from a low bitrate (except those few early bad Blu-ray MPEG-2 releases). As long as this movie is not done in MPEG-2, there is no reason it should be spread out over more than 50GB, or likely even anywhere near that much, including PCM 5.1 audio.

Good idea but not possible in this case. Around the World in 80 Days (and Oklahoma!) were actually filmed twice with different takes, camera setups, and some editing, once in 70MM and once in 35MM. The difference is profound.

Ouch. Then we have to find a yellow layer of the 70mm version from somewhere else. There must be at least one print or something... If not, there are colorisation techniques. :D
Get those eye witnesses here before they are all dead. How yellow was that shirt? That buttercup? Hey, we got the 35mm version! Identify the same objects with automatic object tracking!

Why is Sony putting Hollow Man on shelves but not LOA?

Is this going to hit this year? or even at all?

Why is Sony putting Hollow Man on shelves but not LOA?

Is this going to hit this year? or even at all?

Paidgeek confirmed LOA will be a 2008 release.

Paidgeek confirmed LOA will be a 2008 release.

Awesome. But there's nothing more specific is there?:)

No.

<snip>
I know this is a BRD Software Forum, but if you want to see what a well transfered 65mm film looks like - see GRAND PRIX. It is stunning to say the least.
<snip>

I concur! I watched Grand Prix for the first time last night on HD DVD and it was very impressive. Give me more movies like this one!

This is my favorite movie. I cannot wait until this is on Bluray.

This is my favorite movie. I cannot wait until this is on Bluray.

You have great taste my friend! :cool:

The poll options aren't as explicit as I'd like them to be. I voted for the least popular choice (single 50GB w/ 2.0 PCM + THD) for the following reasons:

I'd prefer having the entire movie on a single disc. A 2-disc set with supplementary material on the second disc is probably ideal, but I'd rather not split the movie. The poll isn't entirely clear on this point for the first two options.

I'll assume use of lossless encoding for audio since it will already be a challenge to fit a movie this long on a single disc. Having a redundant 5.1 PCM + lossless track is a waste, and only useful for a brief interim period while everyone's getting the advanced audio codec story straightened out on the players.

You have great taste my friend! :cool:

*bows*

This will be, I think, the 4th time I'm buying the movie, which is absurd for me. Besides owning the laserdisc, I bought the DVD double set when it came out on top of the Superbit. I'll keep buying them if they keep releasing them, though.

Still, once I saw it in 70mm at the Ziegfeld a few years ago I haven't been happy with the DVDs. The Bluray trailer on Casino Royale had a brief clip of Lawrence and it immediately reminded me of that screening. I can't wait for this to come out.

I still have not gotten around to watching my SB DVD.

Can't wait to see this truly large format film on a next gen format.

No matter how much video bandwidth they allocate to this film, the fact that Lawrence was filmed in 70mm could never be fully captured by lowly 1080p. To truly appreciate this film in its full majesty we need to wait for next next gen format with minimum of 4K or 8K transfers. So BD50 with AVC/VC1 and TrueHD/LPCM is good enough anyways for this gen, no need to pull out a superbit style because of current gen's 1080p limitation anyways.

Paidgeek confirmed LOA will be a 2008 release.
The new 2-disc Collector's Edition dvd was supposed to release this year and got delayed. I wonder if they are holding it back until the BD is ready so they can release both on the same day...

Either way, 2008 will give us LOA in HD. And I know this title is hated by many, but 2008 will also bring us, finally, the DaVinci Code.

You forgot codec ;) I'll take AVC pls :) None of this VC1 crap!

Since this is a Sony title, I think you don't have to worry about this title having VC-1. It's the possible MPEG-2 encoding that you have to worry about:D

Sony would very much like to release LoA, Kwai, Navarrone, and all of their other older classics. They are very proud of these films.

The difficulty is that it is very apparent that sales are very low for classic titles right now. Here are some Videoscan data for a few HD DVD titles from release last fall through March 2007:

Forbidden Planet (HD DVD): 1311
Forbidden Planet (HD DVD "Ultimate"): 440
Grand Prix (HD DVD): 2177
Mutiny on the Bounty (HD DVD): 653

When I saw these and similar numbers, my heart sank. I realized it was going to be a very long time before we see classics on Blu-ray. No wonder Warners never bothered releasing these titles on Blu-ray, who could blame them for waiting? No wonder Sony is holding up LoA.

IMO, the current adopters who care about the classics already have huge collections and don't necessarily want to buy more copies of even their favorite films just yet. Also, a lot of the demographic for both formats (especially Blu-ray with the PS3) veers toward sci-fi and action.

According to this view, we have to wait until adoption greatly increases and we see a lot more people from a broader demographic and people who don't already have big collections.

This is another road that leads us back to Rome: we need to end the format war so that adoption will increase and broaden so that we can see more classic titles from all studios.

Hey, I did my part. I bought all three of those films on release date.